Interestingly, a few months ago on Robert Mangino’s show on KDKA I heard the executive director of the anti-gun group Ceasefire PA make a similar statement that magazines would be “used up” as people fired them.

Shyster wrote:A Colorado Congresswoman who is the co-author (along with NY’s Carolyn McCarthy) of a bill banning what she calls “assault magazines” is apparently under the impression that magazines are disposable:

Interestingly, a few months ago on Robert Mangino’s show on KDKA I heard the executive director of the anti-gun group Ceasefire PA make a similar statement that magazines would be “used up” as people fired them.

shafnutz05 wrote:

Gaucho wrote:North Korea. WTF?

For the first time in the entire history of North Korea acting stupid, I am starting to grow concerned.

Calabrese — a privacy lobbyist — was first careful to note that the ACLU doesn’t strictly oppose universal background checks for gun purchases. “If you’re going to require a background check, we think it should be effective,” Calabrese explained.

“However, we also believe those checks have to be conducted in a way that protects privacy and civil liberties. So, in that regard, we think the current legislation, the current proposal on universal background checks raises two significant concerns,” he went on.

“The first is that it treats the records for private purchases very differently than purchases made through licensed sellers. Under existing law, most information regarding an approved purchase is destroyed within 24 hours when a licensed seller does a [National Instant Criminal Background Check System] check now,” Calabrese said, “and almost all of it is destroyed within 90 days.”

Calabrese wouldn’t characterize the current legislation’s record-keeping provision as a “national gun registry” — which the White House has denied pursuing — but he did say that such a registry could be “a second step.”

“[U]nfortunately, we have seen in the past that the creation of these types of records leads sometimes to the creation of government databases and collections of personal information on all of us,” Calabrese warned. “That’s not an inevitable result, but we have seen that happen in the past, certainly.”

Calabrese — a privacy lobbyist — was first careful to note that the ACLU doesn’t strictly oppose universal background checks for gun purchases. “If you’re going to require a background check, we think it should be effective,” Calabrese explained.

“However, we also believe those checks have to be conducted in a way that protects privacy and civil liberties. So, in that regard, we think the current legislation, the current proposal on universal background checks raises two significant concerns,” he went on.

“The first is that it treats the records for private purchases very differently than purchases made through licensed sellers. Under existing law, most information regarding an approved purchase is destroyed within 24 hours when a licensed seller does a [National Instant Criminal Background Check System] check now,” Calabrese said, “and almost all of it is destroyed within 90 days.”

Calabrese wouldn’t characterize the current legislation’s record-keeping provision as a “national gun registry” — which the White House has denied pursuing — but he did say that such a registry could be “a second step.”

“[U]nfortunately, we have seen in the past that the creation of these types of records leads sometimes to the creation of government databases and collections of personal information on all of us,” Calabrese warned. “That’s not an inevitable result, but we have seen that happen in the past, certainly.”

As I posted above, anti-gun Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) made an ass of herself by revealing at a forum on guns that she was under the (completely false and preposterous) impression that gun magazines are disposable and will be quickly used up if banned. Her spokeswoman followed up to “clarify” the Congresswoman’s comment and actually made it worse:

“She simply misspoke in referring to ‘magazines,’ when she should have referred to ‘clips,’ which cannot be reused because they don’t have a feeding mechanism,” spokeswoman Juliet Johnson said.

In fact, clips for the most part are every bit as reusable as magazines. For example, M1 Garand en-bloc clips and revolver moon clips can be reused dozens if not hundreds of times. Not only does Congresswoman DeGette have no idea how the devices she wants to ban work, her staff doesn’t either.

Shyster wrote:In fact, clips for the most part are every bit as reusable as magazines. For example, M1 Garand en-bloc clips and revolver moon clips can be reused dozens if not hundreds of times. Not only does Congresswoman DeGette have no idea how the devices she wants to ban work, her staff doesn’t either.

From what you've been saying since the Newtown shootings, this seems to be a common theme.

Shyster wrote:In fact, clips for the most part are every bit as reusable as magazines. For example, M1 Garand en-bloc clips and revolver moon clips can be reused dozens if not hundreds of times. Not only does Congresswoman DeGette have no idea how the devices she wants to ban work, her staff doesn’t either.

From what you've been saying since the Newtown shootings, this seems to be a common theme.

Biden has already said these laws wouldn't have prevented Newtown and won't stop anything else in the future. They are a burden on the people who are already following the laws and the people who are or will break them don't care.

Shyster wrote:In fact, clips for the most part are every bit as reusable as magazines. For example, M1 Garand en-bloc clips and revolver moon clips can be reused dozens if not hundreds of times. Not only does Congresswoman DeGette have no idea how the devices she wants to ban work, her staff doesn’t either.

From what you've been saying since the Newtown shootings, this seems to be a common theme.

Biden has already said these laws wouldn't have prevented Newtown and won't stop anything else in the future. They are a burden on the people who are already following the laws and the people who are or will break them don't care.

Indeed. Take this provision of Connecticut’s new gun-ban law that was just passed. This is one of the limited ways someone may still possess a “large capacity” (i.e. more than 10 rounds) magazine:

(7) Pursuant to a valid permit to carry a pistol or revolver, provided such large capacity magazine (A) is within a pistol or revolver that was lawfully possessed by the person prior to the effective date of this section, (B) does not extend beyond the bottom of the pistol grip, and (C) contains not more than ten bullets.

So you can keep that 15-round Glock 22 magazine, but you can’t load more than 10 rounds in it. Want to use it as your spare mag when concealed carrying? Nope, it’s only legal when it’s actually in the gun. Want to use that magazine in your smaller Glock 27? Nope, it won’t be legal because the magazine will stick out slightly. Want to trade your existing model 22 in on a new-and-updated Gen4 model? Can’t use that old mag in the new gun, as you didn’t own the new gun prior to the passage of the stupid law. Will criminals follow any of these stupid requirements? Nope. This is just intended to annoy and harass law-abiding gun owners.

Last edited by Shyster on Thu Apr 04, 2013 3:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Shyster wrote:Not only does Congresswoman DeGette have no idea how the devices she wants to ban work, her staff doesn’t either.

They certainly don't know the difference between a clip and a magazine..... probably didn't even realize there was a difference before this.

DelPen wrote:Biden has already said these laws wouldn't have prevented Newtown and won't stop anything else in the future. They are a burden on the people who are already following the laws and the people who are or will break them don't care.

He also advocates a method of home defense ("go out on your balcony with a shotgun and fire off a few shots") that is illegal.

DelPen wrote:Biden has already said these laws wouldn't have prevented Newtown and won't stop anything else in the future. They are a burden on the people who are already following the laws and the people who are or will break them don't care.

He also advocates a method of home defense ("go out on your balcony with a shotgun and fire off a few shots") that is illegal.